A comparison of bootstrap approaches for homogeneity test based on dichotomous outcome in meta-analysis

被引:0
|
作者
Lee, J. Y. [1 ]
Shen, P. S. [2 ]
Cheng, K. F. [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Feng Chia Univ, Dept Stat, 100 Wenhwa Rd, Taichung 40724, Taiwan
[2] Tunghai Univ, Dept Stat, Taichung, Taiwan
[3] Taipei Med Univ, Biostat Ctr, Taipei, Taiwan
[4] Asia Univ, Dept Business Adm, Taichung, Taiwan
关键词
Bootstrap; Dichotomous outcome; Homogeneity test; Meta-analysis; odds ratio; RANDOM-EFFECTS MODEL; CONFIDENCE-INTERVALS; CLINICAL-TRIALS; HETEROGENEITY; VARIANCE;
D O I
10.1080/03610918.2021.1955266
中图分类号
O21 [概率论与数理统计]; C8 [统计学];
学科分类号
020208 ; 070103 ; 0714 ;
摘要
Meta-analysis is a useful research methodology which combines results of multiple studies to estimate means of outcomes of interest. To effectively conduct a meta-analysis, it is critical to assess whether study homogeneity is a reasonable assumption. In literature, many approaches have been proposed to estimate the between-study variance and test the assumption of study homogeneity. One approach is the parametric bootstrap method, which has the disadvantage of underestimating type I error rates at small sample size. In this article, we propose a novel bootstrap method to improve the shortcomings of the parametric bootstrap. We focus on testing homogeneity of the odds-ratio in different studies. In our approach, we first estimate response probabilities in the 2 x 2 tables under the assumption of homogeneity and then generate bootstrap samples based on the estimated probabilities. The performance of the novel bootstrap is evaluated through simulation studies conducted based on Cochran Q-statistics and several commonly used heterogeneity estimators. Simulation results show that Cochran Q-statistics based on both bootstrap methods properly control type I error rate except in the situation where both event probability and sample size are small. In general, the novel bootstrap tends to overestimate type I error while the parametric bootstrap tends to underestimate type I error. However, overestimation does not occur when using the novel bootstrap combined with tests based on the ML and REML. In this case, the novel bootstrap method controls type I error rates better than the parametric bootstrap and is as powerful as the parametric bootstrap. We illustrate the proposed method using two real data sets.
引用
收藏
页码:4218 / 4229
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Comparison of four heterogeneity measures for meta-analysis
    Lin, Lifeng
    JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2020, 26 (01) : 376 - 384
  • [32] Comparison of meta-analysis approaches for neuroimaging studies of reward processing: A case study
    Chawla, Manisha
    Miyapuram, Krishna P.
    2015 INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCE ON NEURAL NETWORKS (IJCNN), 2015,
  • [33] Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies with multiple thresholds: Comparison of different approaches
    Zapf, Antonia
    Albert, Christian
    Fromke, Cornelia
    Haase, Michael
    Hoyer, Annika
    Jones, Hayley E.
    Rucker, Gerta
    BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 2021, 63 (04) : 699 - 711
  • [34] Meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy in neurosurgical practice
    Dubourg, Julie
    Berhouma, Moncef
    Cotton, Michael
    Messerer, Mahmoud
    NEUROSURGICAL FOCUS, 2012, 33 (01)
  • [35] The power of the standard test for the presence of heterogeneity in meta-analysis
    Jackson, Dan
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2006, 25 (15) : 2688 - 2699
  • [36] A comparison of different surgical approaches to hemiarthroplasty for the femoral neck fractures: A meta-analysis
    Liang, Shuai
    Wu, Huiwen
    Deng, Shihao
    Wang, Fangyuan
    Jing, Juehua
    Li, Jun
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2023, 9
  • [37] Comparison between anterior approaches and posterior approaches for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A meta-analysis
    Sun, Yifu
    Li, Le
    Zhao, Jianhui
    Gu, Rui
    CLINICAL NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY, 2015, 134 : 28 - 36
  • [38] Inference using an exact distribution of test statistic for random-effects meta-analysis
    Hanada, Keisuke
    Sugimoto, Tomoyuki
    ANNALS OF THE INSTITUTE OF STATISTICAL MATHEMATICS, 2023, 75 (02) : 281 - 302
  • [39] A meta-analysis of the Mantel-Haenszel procedure in the detection of DIF in dichotomous items
    Guilera, Georgina
    Gomez-Benito, Juana
    Dolores Hidalgo, Ma
    Sanchez-Meca, Julio
    ANUARIO DE PSICOLOGIA, 2007, 38 (03): : 431 - 442
  • [40] A model-based correction for outcome reporting bias in meta-analysis
    Copas, John
    Dwan, Kerry
    Kirkham, Jamie
    Williamson, Paula
    BIOSTATISTICS, 2014, 15 (02) : 370 - 383